The Washington D.C. office of the EEOC brought this action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, against HARCO, Inc., d/b/a Archibald's. The complaint, filed in September 2002, alleged sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, ...
read more >

The Washington D.C. office of the EEOC brought this action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, against HARCO, Inc., d/b/a Archibald's. The complaint, filed in September 2002, alleged sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, the complaint alleged that Defendant failed to promote the charging party to a management position because of her sex and that female employees were subject to disparate terms and conditions of employment because of their sex.

Three days after the complaint was filed, a consent decree was proposed by the EEOC and was signed in December 2002. The consent decree, which was valid for two years, included a non-discrimination provision and required Defendant to provide training on sex discrimination for its managers, pay the charging party a total of $12,000, require male and female bartenders to wear substantially equivalent attire, post a non-discrimination notice in a location easily accessible and frequented by employees, and provide the EEOC with regular status reports on the implementation of these requirements.